Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (FMEA) Packet

This packet is intended for use in the fourth year mechanical engineering design
sequence. The material in this packet should help design teams perform a Failure Mode and
Effect Analysis (FMEA) or a Failure Mode, Effect, and Criticality Analysis (FMECA) on their
design projects. This experience should increase the students’ awareness of safety and reliability
issues. The FMEA or FMECA should also help the design teams to improve the safety and
reliability of their products while at the same time reducing design time and expenses. An
example FMECA is included in the lecture. A homework assignment is included which involves
completing an FMECA.

Time for presentation is estimated as 40-45 minutes.

Objectives:

1. To develop an understanding of the procedure used to perform an FMEA or FMECA.

2. To understand the benefits of using an FMEA or FMECA.
3. To increase awareness of safety and reliability issues.
4. To help students improve the safety and reliability of their projects while reducing
design time and expenses.

This packet includes the following items:

• Lecture material for the instructor

• Overheads for use during the lecture
• Handouts for the students
• Homework problem and instructor solution
 Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (FMEA) Lecture Outline

I. Introduction to Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (OVERHEAD 1)

A. The Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (FMEA) is a “logical, structured analysis of a
system, subsystem, device, or process” (Schubert, 1992). It is one of the most commonly
used reliability and system safety analysis techniques.
1. The FMEA is used to identify possible failure modes, their causes, and the effects of
these failures.
2. Proper identification of failures may lead to solutions that increase the overall
reliability and safety of a product.
B. Timing (OVERHEAD 2)
1. Initially, the FMEA should be performed while in the design stage, but it also may be
used throughout the life cycle of a product to identify possible failures as the system
ages.
2. Failure mode and effect analyses may vary in the level of detail reported, depending
upon the detail needed and the availability of information. As a development
matures, assessment of criticality is added in what becomes a Failure Mode, Effects,
and Criticality Analysis, or FMECA.
C. Benefits of FMEA (OVERHEAD 3)
1. The final product must be “safe”, as defined by the application. FMEA helps
designers to identify and eliminate or control dangerous failure modes, minimizing
damage to the system and its users.
2. An increasingly accurate estimate of probability of failure will be developed,
especially if reliable probability data is generated with an FMECA.
3. Reliability of the product will improve.
4. The design time will be reduced due to timely identification and correction of
problems.
D. Other possible uses of FMEA (OVERHEAD 4)
1. FMEA can be used in the preparation of diagnostic procedures.
2. FMEA can be used to set appropriate maintenance procedures and intervals.
3. In legal proceedings, FMEA may be used as documentation of the safety
considerations that were involved in the design.
4. As listed in MIL-STD-1629A, additional applications for FMEA include
“maintainability, safety analysis, survivability and vulnerability, logistics support
analysis, maintenance plan analysis, and for failure detection and isolation subsystem
design.” Failure mode and effect analyses can be used for many applications in
which reliability and safety are a concern.
II. Types of FMEA (OVERHEAD 5)
A. Two main types of failure mode and effect analyses are used.
1. Functional
a. This type of FMEA assumes a failure, and then identifies how that failure could
occur.
b. The functional approach is typically used when individual items cannot be
identified or a complex system exists.
 c. The functional approach generally involves a top-down analysis in which a
specific failure mode for the entire system is traced back to the initiating
subsystem failure mode(s).
2. Hardware
a. The hardware approach investigates smaller portions of the system, such as
subassemblies and individual components.
b. The hardware approach generally involves a bottom-up analysis in which the
effects of possible failure modes of a subsystem, assembly, component, part, etc.
on the entire system are identified.
B. This lecture will cover the hardware approach to FMEA since it is more
commonly used than the functional approach.
III. FMECA (Failure Mode, Effects, and Criticality Analysis) (OVERHEAD 6)
A. An FMECA is essentially an FMEA, with an added criticality analysis. Another section
should be added to the tabular format for criticality.
B. A failure mode, effects, and criticality analysis (FMECA) is performed to evaluate
reliability and safety by identifying critical failure modes and their effects on the system.
C. The FMECA is performed on parts that are especially critical to the operation and well
being of operators. A thorough knowledge of the system is required to complete an
FMECA.
D. FMECAs can also be used to analyze processes, with the focus on process functions and
operations and how failure may occur.
E. Failure data is necessary to complete the criticality portion of an FMECA.
F. (OVERHEAD 7) Failure modes may be ranked by the assigned criticality to determine
which failure mode should be reduced in criticality by redesign or other abatement
methods. System users should specify acceptable criticality levels.
G. Three ways to complete FMECA:
1. Use criticality indices.
2. The severity and probability indices are added together to yield the
criticality index. It represents a measure of the overall risk associated with each
combination of severity and probability. This method is commonly used in
preliminary design when the failure probabilities are not known.
3. Another method, which will only be mentioned here, involves determining the
criticality using failure probability.
H. (OVERHEAD 8) A failure mode, effects, and criticality analysis can be a starting point
for many other types of analyses, including:
1. System Safety Analysis
2. Production Planning
3. Test Planning and Validation
4. Repair Level Analysis
5. Logistics Support Analysis
6. Maintenance Planning Analysis.
These additional analyses may also be used to update and improve the FMECA as new
information evolves.
IV. Performing an FMEA (OVERHEAD 9)
A. The scope of an FMEA should be determined while information is being collected to
perform the analysis.
 B. The following information may be helpful when preparing an FMEA:
1. Design drawings
2. System schematics
3. Functional diagrams
4. Previous analytical data (if available)
5. System descriptions
6. Data gained from past experience
7. Manufacturer’s component data/specifications
8. Preliminary hazard list (if available)
9. Preliminary hazard analysis
10. Other system analyses previously performed
(Vincoli, 1997.)
C. Many documents exist that provide guidance on how to perform an FMEA.
1. MIL-STD-1629A was the standard for the U.S. military until 1998.
2. On August 4, 1998, the military standard, MIL-STD-1629A dated 24 November
1980, was rescinded, with instructions for users to “consult various national and
international documents for information regarding failure mode, effects, and
criticality analysis.”
3. Because no better reference exists than the rescinded MIL-STD-1629A, it is used as a
primary reference for this module.
V. Steps in FMEA (OVERHEAD 10)
A. The following is a procedure for performing an FMEA.
1. Define the scope of the analysis.
a. Resolution
i. Decide on an appropriate system level at which to perform the FMEA
(subsystem, assembly, subassembly, component, part, etc.)
ii. Generally, the resolution of the FMEA should be increased as the design
progresses.
b. Focus
i. The FMEA may be intended to determine the effects of failure modes on
individual areas such as safety, mission success, or repair cost.
ii. For example, a safety-focused FMEA might indicate that a particular failure
mode is not very critical, even though the failure may result in significant
repair costs or downtime.
2. (OVERHEAD 11) Prepare a block diagram of the system - A block diagram
graphically shows the relationship between the system’s components.
3. Identify possible failure modes for each component.
a. What is the failure mode?
i. Failure modes are ways the system or component might fail. They might
include yielding, ductile rupture, brittle fracture, fatigue, corrosion, wear,
impact failure, fretting, thermal shock, radiation, buckling, and corrosion
fatigue.
ii. An example of a failure mode would be corrosion, which might cause a metal
pipe underneath a kitchen sink to develop a leak.
b. How does the failure occur?
i. Example: Corrosion is a time-based failure mode that would attack the metal
 pipe over time. Water and other particulate material are a requirement for
corrosion to occur.
4. (OVERHEAD 12) Identify possible causes for each failure mode.
a. What is the root cause?
i. Example: An uncoated metal pipe that has water running through it regularly.
5. Analyze the effects of the failure modes.
a. What are the effects of the failure?
i. Local effects.
(i) Example: A hole would develop in the pipe causing a water leak. Water
damage to the surrounding environment may occur.
ii. System effects.
(i) Example: The system is defined as a house. Further water damage could
result and possibly major flooding if corrective action is not taken in a
reasonable amount of time.
6. (OVERHEAD 13) Classify the severity of the effects of each failure mode using the
following four categories:
a. 4. Catastrophic (Death or system loss)
b. 3. Critical (Severe injury, occupational illness, or system damage)
c. 2. Marginal (Minor injury, occupational illness, or system damage)
d. 1. Negligible (Less than minor injury, occupational illness, or system damage)
(Bloswick, NIOSH P.O. #939341 and MIL-STD-882B)
7. (OVERHEAD 14) Estimate the probability of each failure mode. Failure mode
probabilities may be classified as follows:
a. 4. Probable (Likely to occur immediately or within a short period of time)
b. 3. Reasonably Probable (Probably will occur in time)
c. 2. Remote (Possible to occur in time)
d. 1. Extremely Remote (Unlikely to occur)
Note: (OVERHEAD 15) Severity and probability rankings will help the designer(s) to
identify the criticality of the potential failure and the areas of the design that need
the most attention. When a criticality index is included, the analysis is called a
Failure Modes, Effects, and Criticality Analysis, or FMECA.
(Bloswick, NIOSH P.O. #939341)
8. For each failure mode, either propose modifications to prevent or control the failure
mode or justify the acceptance of the failure mode and its potential effects.
9. The criticality index is often defined as the sum or product of the severity and
probability indices. The higher the criticality index, the higher the priority for
change. The actual categorization of criticality indices into specific change priorities
is generally a management decision.
VI. Example (pressure cooker) (OVERHEAD 16)
A. FMECA are generally presented in a tabular form.
B. Discuss the example FMECA.
–Overhead 17: Defined scope
–Overhead 18: Block diagram
–Overhead 19-20: Completed FMECA
VII. FMECA Output (OVERHEAD 21)
 A. Information gained from FMECA includes:
1. Listing of potential failure modes and failure causes. These could help guide the
system testing and inspection techniques.
2. Further designation (criticality) of potential failures that could affect overall system
performance.
3. Detection and control measures for each failure mode.
4. Management information.
5. Input for further analysis.
VIII. Limitations of FMECA (OVERHEAD 22)
A. Critical failure modes, causes, or effects that are not recognized by the designer(s) will
not be addressed by the FMECA.
B. FMECA does not account for multiple-failure interactions, meaning that each failure is
considered individually and the effect of several failures is not accounted for.
C. FMECA does not analyze dangers or problems that may occur when the system is
operating properly.
D. Human factors are not considered.
IX. Lecture Summary (OVERHEAD 23)
A. The overall safety of a design can be improved by using FMECA during the design
process.
B. The quality of the final product will be improved.
C. The design process will be faster and progress more smoothly.
OVERHEADS
 1

Failure Mode and Effect Analysis

The Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (FMEA)

is a “logical, structured analysis of a system,
subsystem, device, or process.”

It is one of the most commonly used reliability

and system safety analysis techniques.

• The FMEA is used to identify possible failure

modes, their causes, and the effects of these
failures.

• Proper identification of failures may lead to

solutions that increase the overall reliability
and safety of a product.
 2

Timing

Initially, the FMEA should be performed while

in the design stage, but it also may be used
throughout the life cycle of a product to identify
possible failures as the system ages.
Failure mode and effect analyses may vary in
the level of detail reported, depending upon the
detail needed and the availability of
information. As a development matures,
assessment of criticality is added in what
becomes a Failure Mode, Effects, and Criticality
Analysis, or FMECA.
 3

Benefits of FMEA

• The final product must be “safe”, as defined

by the application. FMEA helps designers to
identify and eliminate or control dangerous
failure modes, minimizing damage to the
system and its users.

• An increasingly accurate estimate of

probability of failure will be developed,
especially if reliable probability data is
generated with an FMECA.

• Reliability of the product will improve.

• The design time will be reduced due to timely

identification and correction of problems.
 4

Other Possible Uses of FMEA

• FMEA can be used in the preparation of
diagnostic procedures.
• FMEA can be used to set appropriate
maintenance procedures and intervals.
• In legal proceedings, FMEA may be used as
documentation of the safety
considerations that were involved in the
design.
• As listed in MIL-STD-1629A, additional
applications for FMEA include
“maintainability, safety analysis, survivability
and vulnerability, logistics support analysis,
maintenance plan analysis, and for failure
detection and isolation subsystem design.”
 5

Types of FMEA

Two main types of failure mode and effect analyses

are used.
• Functional
o This type of FMEA assumes a failure, and
then identifies how that failure could occur.
o The functional approach is typically used
when individual items cannot be identified or
a complex system exists.
o The functional approach generally involves a
top-down analysis in which a specific failure
mode for the entire system is traced back to
the initiating subsystem failure mode(s).
• Hardware
o The hardware approach investigates smaller
portions of the system, such as subassemblies
and individual components.
o The hardware approach generally involves a
bottom-up analysis in which the effects of
possible failure modes of a subsystem,
assembly, component, part, etc. on the entire
system are identified.
 6

Failure Mode, Effects, and Criticality Analysis

An FMECA is essentially an FMEA, with an

added criticality analysis. An additional section
should be added to the tabular format for
criticality.
• A FMECA is performed to evaluate reliability
and safety by identifying critical failure modes
and their effects on the system.
• The FMECA is performed on parts that are
especially critical to the operation and well
being of operators. A thorough knowledge of
the system is required to complete an
FMECA.
• Failure data is necessary to complete the
criticality portion of an FMECA.
 7

FMECA
• Failure modes may be ranked by the assigned
criticality to determine which failure mode
should be reduced in criticality by redesign or
other abatement methods. System users
should specify acceptable criticality levels.
• Three ways to complete FMECA:
o Use criticality indices.
o The severity and probability indices are
added together to yield the
criticality index. It represents a measure
of the overall risk associated with each
combination of severity and probability.
This method is commonly used in
preliminary design when the failure
probabilities are not known.
o Another method, which will only be
mentioned here, involves determining the
criticality using failure probability.
 8

A failure mode, effects, and criticality analysis can

be a starting point for many other types of analyses,
including:
System Safety
Analysis

Maintenance
Planning Test Planning
Analysis

FMECA

Logistics
Production Support
Planning Analysis

Repair Level
Analysis

These additional analyses may also be used to

update and improve the FMECA as new information
evolves.
 9

Performing an FMEA

The scope of an FMEA should be determined while

information is being collected to perform the
analysis.
The following information may be helpful when
preparing an FMEA:
!"Design drawings
!"System schematics
!"Functional diagrams
!"Previous analytical data (if available)
!"System descriptions
!"Data gained from past experience
!"Manufacturer’s component
data/specifications
!"Preliminary hazard list (if available)
!"Preliminary hazard analysis
!"Other system analyses previously
performed
 10

Steps in FMEA
The following is a procedure for performing an
FMEA.
• Define the scope of the analysis.
o Resolution
!"Decide on an appropriate system level at
which to perform the FMEA (subsystem,
assembly, subassembly, component, part,
etc.)
!"Generally, the resolution of the FMEA
should be increased as the design
progresses.
o Focus
!"The FMEA may be intended to determine
the effects of failure modes on
individual areas such as safety, mission
success, or repair cost.
!"For example, a safety-focused FMEA
might indicate that a particular failure
mode is not very critical, even though the
failure may result in significant repair
costs or downtime.
 11

• Prepare a block diagram of the system - A block

diagram graphically shows the relationship
between the system’s components.
• Identify possible failure modes for each
component.
o What is the failure mode?
!"Failure modes are ways the system or
component might fail. They might
include yielding, ductile rupture, brittle
fracture, fatigue, corrosion, wear, impact
failure, fretting, thermal shock, radiation,
buckling, and corrosion fatigue.
!"An example of a failure mode would be
corrosion, which might cause a metal pipe
underneath a kitchen sink to develop a
leak.
o How does the failure occur?
!"Example: Corrosion is a time-based
failure mode that would attack the metal
pipe over time. Water and other
particulate material are a requirement for
corrosion to occur.
 12

Identify possible causes for each failure mode.

!"What is the root cause?
• Example: An uncoated metal pipe that has
water running through it regularly.
Analyze the effects of the failure modes.
!"What are the effects of the failure?
• Local effects.
o Example: A hole would develop in the
pipe causing a water leak. Water
damage to the surrounding
environment may occur.
• System effects.
o Example: The system is defined as a
house. Further water damage could
result and possibly major flooding if
corrective action is not taken in a
reasonable amount of time.
 13

Classify the severity of the effects of each failure

mode using the following four categories:
4. Catastrophic (Death or system loss)
3. Critical (Severe injury, occupational illness, or
system damage)
2. Marginal (Minor injury, occupational illness, or
system damage)
1. Negligible (Less than minor injury, occupational
illness, or system damage)
 14

Estimate the probability of each failure mode.

Failure mode probabilities may be classified as
follows:

4. Probable (Likely to occur immediately or within

a short period of time)
3. Reasonably Probable (Probably will occur in
time)
2. Remote (Possible to occur in time)
1. Extremely Remote (Unlikely to occur)
 15

Note: Severity and probability rankings will help

the designer(s) to identify the criticality of the
potential failure and the areas of the design that need
the most attention. When a criticality index is
included, the analysis is called a Failure Modes,
Effects, and Criticality Analysis, or FMECA.

For each failure mode, either propose modifications

to prevent or control the failure mode or justify the
acceptance of the failure mode and its effects.

The criticality index is often defined as the sum or

product of the severity and probability indices. The
higher the criticality index, the higher the priority for
change. The actual categorization of criticality
indices into specific change priorities is generally a
management decision.
 16

Pressure Gage

Safety
Valve

Thermostat

Plug
Heating Coil

Pressure Cooker Safety Features

1. Safety valve relieves pressure before it reaches dangerous levels.

2. Thermostat opens circuit through heating coil when the temperature

rises above 250° C.

3. Pressure gage is divided into green and red sections. "Danger" is

indicated when the pointer is in the red section.
 17

Pressure Cooker FMECA

Define Scope:

1. Resolution - The analysis will be

restricted to the four major subsystems
(electrical system, safety valve,
thermostat, and pressure gage).

2. Focus - Safety
 18

Pressure Cooker Block Diagram

Pressure Cooker

Safety Valve Pressure Gage

Electrical System Thermostat

Heating Coil Cord Plug

Valve Spring Valve Casing

 19

Failure Modes, Effects and Criticality Analysis for a Pressure Cooker (hardware approach with a focus on safety)

Item Failure Mode Failure Causes Failure Effects Severity Probability Criticality Control Measures/Remarks

• Defective cord • Use high-quality

Cooking
• Defective plug components.
No current interruption 1 2 2
• Defective • Periodically inspect cord
(mission failure)
heating coil and plug.
Electrical
• Use a grounded (3-prong)
System
Current flows to • Shock plug.
ground by an Faulty insulation • Cooking 2 1 2 • Only plug into outlets
alternate route interruption controlled by ground-fault
circuit interrupters.
• Steam could
Design spring to handle the
Broken valve burn operator
Open 2 2 4 fatigue and corrosion that it
spring • Increased
will be subjected to.
Safety Valve cooking time
• Corrosion • Use corrosion-resistant
Potential
Closed • Faulty 1 2 2 materials.
overpressurization
manufacture • Test the safety valve.
Defective Cooking
Open 1 2 2 Use a high-quality thermostat.
thermostat interruption
Thermostat Overpressurization
Defective
Closed eventually opens 1 2 2 Use a high-quality thermostat.
thermostat
valve
Operator is not
• Corrosion • Use corrosion-resistant
Pressure Falsely indicates safe alerted of unsafe
• Faulty 4 2 8 materials.
Gage conditions pressure build-up
manufacture • Test the safety valve.
(explosion)
 Operator might
• Corrosion
Falsely indicates assume system will
• Faulty 1 2 2
unsafe conditions not operate
manufacture
correctly
Broken valve • Design spring to handle
Increased cooking
spring and the fatigue and corrosion
Both open time or cooking 1 2 2
defective that it will be subjected to.
Safety Valve interruption
thermostat • Use corrosion-resistant
and
Corroded or materials.
Thermostat • Loss of system
otherwise faulty • Test the safety valve.
Both closed • Severe injuries 4 2 8
valve and defective • Use a high-quality
or fatalities
thermostat thermostat
 21

Information gained from FMECA

Information gained from FMECA includes:
1. Listing of potential failure modes and failure
causes. These could help guide the system
testing and inspection techniques.
2. Further designation (criticality) of potential
failures that could affect overall system
performance.
3. Detection and control measures for each
failure mode.
4. Management information.
5. Input for further analysis.
 22

Limitations of FMECA

1. Failure modes must be foreseen by the

designer(s).

2. FMECA does not account for multiple-

failure interactions.

3. FMECA does not analyze dangers or

problems that may occur when the system is
operating properly.

4. Human factors are not considered.

 23

Lecture Summary

• The overall safety of a design can be

improved by using FMEA/FMECA during the
design process.

• The quality of the final product will be

improved.

• The design process will be faster and progress

more smoothly.
 Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (FMEA) Lecture Handout
I. Introduction to Failure Mode and Effect Analysis
A. The Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (FMEA) is a “logical, structured analysis of a
system, subsystem, device, or process” (Schubert, 1992). It is one of the most commonly
used reliability and system safety analysis techniques.
1. The FMEA is used to identify possible failure modes, their causes, and the effects of
these failures.
2. Proper identification of failures may lead to solutions that increase the overall
reliability and safety of a product.
B. Timing
1. Initially, the FMEA should be performed while in the design stage, but it also may be
used throughout the life cycle of a product to identify possible failures as the system
ages.
2. Failure mode and effect analyses may vary in the level of detail reported, depending
upon the detail needed and the availability of information. As a development
matures, assessment of criticality is added in what becomes a Failure Mode, Effects,
and Criticality Analysis, or FMECA.
C. Benefits of FMEA
1. The final product must be “safe”, as defined by the application. FMEA helps
designers to identify and eliminate or control dangerous failure modes, minimizing
damage to the system and its users.
2. An increasingly accurate estimate of probability of failure will be developed,
especially if reliable probability data is generated with an FMECA.
3. Reliability of the product will improve.
4. The design time will be reduced due to timely identification and correction of
problems.
D. Other possible uses of FMEA
1. FMEA can be used in the preparation of diagnostic procedures.
2. FMEA can be used to set appropriate maintenance procedures and intervals.
3. In legal proceedings, FMEA may be used as documentation of the safety
considerations that were involved in the design.
4. As listed in MIL-STD-1629A, additional applications for FMEA include
“maintainability, safety analysis, survivability and vulnerability, logistics support
analysis, maintenance plan analysis, and for failure detection and isolation subsystem
design.” Failure mode and effect analyses can be used for many applications in
which reliability and safety are a concern.
II. Types of FMEA
A. Two main types of failure mode and effect analyses are used.
1. Functional
a. This type of FMEA assumes a failure, and then identifies how that failure could
occur.
b. The functional approach is typically used when individual items cannot be
identified or a complex system exists.
c. The functional approach generally involves a top-down analysis in which a
specific failure mode for the entire system is traced back to the initiating
subsystem failure mode(s).
 2. Hardware
a. The hardware approach investigates smaller portions of the system, such as
subassemblies and individual components.
b. The hardware approach generally involves a bottom-up analysis in which the
effects of possible failure modes of a subsystem, assembly, component, part, etc.
on the entire system are identified.
B. This lecture will cover the hardware approach to FMEA since it is more
commonly used than the functional approach.
III. FMECA (Failure Mode, Effects, and Criticality Analysis)
A. An FMECA is essentially an FMEA, with an added criticality analysis. Another section
should be added to the tabular format for criticality.
B. A failure mode, effects, and criticality analysis (FMECA) is performed to evaluate
reliability and safety by identifying critical failure modes and their effects on the system.
C. The FMECA is performed on parts that are especially critical to the operation and well
being of operators. A thorough knowledge of the system is required to complete an
FMECA.
D. FMECAs can also be used to analyze processes, with the focus on process functions and
operations and how failure may occur.
E. Failure data is necessary to complete the criticality portion of an FMECA.
F. Failure modes may be ranked by the assigned criticality to determine which failure mode
should be reduced in criticality by redesign or other abatement methods. System users
should specify acceptable criticality levels.
G. Three ways to complete FMECA:
1. Use criticality indices.
2. The severity and probability indices are added together to yield the
criticality index. It represents a measure of the overall risk associated with each
combination of severity and probability. This method is commonly used in
preliminary design when the failure probabilities are not known.
3. Another method, which will only be mentioned here, involves determining the
criticality using failure probability.
H. A failure mode, effects, and criticality analysis can be a starting point for many other
types of analyses, including:
1. System Safety Analysis System Safety
Analysis

2. Production Planning
Maintenance
3. Test Planning and Validation Planning
Analysis
Test Planning

4. Repair Level Analysis

5. Logistics Support Analysis FMECA

6. Maintenance Planning Analysis. Production

Planning
Logistics
Support
Analysis
These additional analyses may also be used to update
and improve the FMECA as new information Repair Level
Analysis

evolves.
IV. Performing an FMEA
A. The scope of an FMEA should be determined while information is being collected to
perform the analysis.
B. The following information may be helpful when preparing an FMEA:
1. Design drawings
 2. System schematics
3. Functional diagrams
4. Previous analytical data (if available)
5. System descriptions
6. Data gained from past experience
7. Manufacturer’s component data/specifications
8. Preliminary hazard list (if available)
9. Preliminary hazard analysis
10. Other system analyses previously performed
(Vincoli, 1997.)
C. Many documents exist that provide guidance on how to perform an FMEA.
1. MIL-STD-1629A was the standard for the U.S. military until 1998.
2. On August 4, 1998, the military standard, MIL-STD-1629A dated 24 November
1980, was rescinded, with instructions for users to “consult various national and
international documents for information regarding failure mode, effects, and
criticality analysis.”
3. Because no better reference exists than the rescinded MIL-STD-1629A, it is used as a
primary reference for this module.
V. Steps in FMEA
A. The following is a procedure for performing an FMEA.
1. Define the scope of the analysis.
a. Resolution
i. Decide on an appropriate system level at which to perform the FMEA
(subsystem, assembly, subassembly, component, part, etc.)
ii. Generally, the resolution of the FMEA should be increased as the design
progresses.
b. Focus
i. The FMEA may be intended to determine the effects of failure modes on
individual areas such as safety, mission success, or repair cost.
ii. For example, a safety-focused FMEA might indicate that a particular failure
mode is not very critical, even though the failure may result in significant
repair costs or downtime.
2. Prepare a block diagram of the system - A block diagram graphically shows the
relationship between the system’s components.
3. Identify possible failure modes for each component.
a. What is the failure mode?
i. Failure modes are ways the system or component might fail. They might
include yielding, ductile rupture, brittle fracture, fatigue, corrosion, wear,
impact failure, fretting, thermal shock, radiation, buckling, and corrosion
fatigue.
ii. An example of a failure mode would be corrosion, which might cause a metal
pipe underneath a kitchen sink to develop a leak.
b. How does the failure occur?
i. Example: Corrosion is a time-based failure mode that would attack the metal
pipe over time. Water and other particulate material are a requirement for
corrosion to occur.
 4. Identify possible causes for each failure mode.
a. What is the root cause?
i. Example: An uncoated metal pipe that has water running through it regularly.
5. Analyze the effects of the failure modes.
a. What are the effects of the failure?
i. Local effects.
(i) Example: A hole would develop in the pipe causing a water leak. Water
damage to the surrounding environment may occur.
ii. System effects.
(i) Example: The system is defined as a house. Further water damage could
result and possibly major flooding if corrective action is not taken in a
reasonable amount of time.
6. Classify the severity of the effects of each failure mode using the following four
categories:
a. 4. Catastrophic (Death or system loss)
b. 3. Critical (Severe injury, occupational illness, or system damage)
c. 2. Marginal (Minor injury, occupational illness, or system damage)
d. 1. Negligible (Less than minor injury, occupational illness, or system damage)
(Bloswick, NIOSH P.O. #939341 and MIL-STD-882B)
7. Estimate the probability of each failure mode. Failure mode probabilities may be
classified as follows:
a. 4. Probable (Likely to occur immediately or within a short period of time)
b. 3. Reasonably Probable (Probably will occur in time)
c. 2. Remote (Possible to occur in time)
d. 1. Extremely Remote (Unlikely to occur)
Note: Severity and probability rankings will help the designer(s) to identify the
criticality of the potential failure and the areas of the design that need the most
attention. When a criticality index is included, the analysis is called a Failure
Modes, Effects, and Criticality Analysis, or FMECA.
(Bloswick, NIOSH P.O. #939341)
8. For each failure mode, either propose modifications to prevent or control the failure
mode or justify the acceptance of the failure mode and its potential effects.
9. The criticality index is often defined as the sum or product of the severity and
probability indices. The higher the criticality index, the higher the priority for
change. The actual categorization of criticality indices into specific change priorities
is generally a management decision.
VI. Example (pressure cooker)
A. FMECA are generally presented in a tabular form.
B. Discuss the example FMECA.
–Defined scope
–Block diagram
–Completed FMECA
VII. FMECA Output
A. Information gained from FMECA includes:
1. Listing of potential failure modes and failure causes. These could help guide the
system testing and inspection techniques.
 2. Further designation (criticality) of potential failures that could affect overall system
performance.
3. Detection and control measures for each failure mode.
4. Management information.
5. Input for further analysis.
VIII. Limitations of FMECA
A. Critical failure modes, causes, or effects that are not recognized by the designer(s) will
not be addressed by the FMECA.
B. FMECA does not account for multiple-failure interactions, meaning that each failure is
considered individually and the effect of several failures is not accounted for.
C. FMECA does not analyze dangers or problems that may occur when the system is
operating properly.
D. Human factors are not considered.
IX. Lecture Summary
A. The overall safety of a design can be improved by using FMECA during the design
process.
B. The quality of the final product will be improved.
C. The design process will be faster and progress more smoothly.
 Pressure Gage

Safety
Valve

Thermostat

Plug
Heating Coil

Pressure Cooker Safety Features

1. Safety valve relieves pressure before it reaches dangerous

levels.

2. Thermostat opens circuit through heating coil when the

temperature rises above 250° C.

3. Pressure gage is divided into green and red sections. "Danger"

is indicated when the pointer is in the red section.
 Pressure Cooker FMECA

Define Scope:

1. Resolution - The analysis will be

restricted to the four major subsystems
(electrical system, safety valve,
thermostat, and pressure gage).

2. Focus - Safety
 Pressure Cooker Block Diagram

Pressure

Safety Valve Pressure Gage

Electrical System Thermostat

Heating Coil Cord Plug

Valve Spring Valve Casing

 Failure Modes, Effects and Criticality Analysis for a Pressure Cooker (hardware approach with a focus on safety)

Item Failure Mode Failure Causes Failure Effects Severity Probability Criticality Control Measures/Remarks

• Defective cord • Use high-quality

Cooking
• Defective plug components.
No current interruption 1 2 2
• Defective • Periodically inspect cord
(mission failure)
heating coil and plug.
Electrical
• Use a grounded (3-prong)
System
Current flows to • Shock plug.
ground by an Faulty insulation • Cooking 2 1 2 • Only plug into outlets
alternate route interruption controlled by ground-fault
circuit interrupters.
• Steam could
Design spring to handle the
Broken valve burn operator
Open 2 2 4 fatigue and corrosion that it
spring • Increased
will be subjected to.
Safety Valve cooking time
• Corrosion • Use corrosion-resistant
Potential
Closed • Faulty 1 2 2 materials.
overpressurization
manufacture • Test the safety valve.
Defective Cooking
Open 1 2 2 Use a high-quality thermostat.
thermostat interruption
Thermostat Overpressurization
Defective
Closed eventually opens 1 2 2 Use a high-quality thermostat.
thermostat
valve
Operator is not
• Corrosion
Falsely indicates safe alerted of unsafe
• Faulty 4 2 8
conditions pressure build-up
manufacture • Use corrosion-resistant
Pressure (explosion)
materials.
Gage Operator might
• Corrosion • Test the safety valve.
Falsely indicates assume system will
• Faulty 1 2 2
unsafe conditions not operate
manufacture
correctly
 Broken valve • Design spring to handle
Increased cooking
spring and the fatigue and corrosion
Both open time or cooking 1 2 2
defective that it will be subjected to.
Safety Valve interruption
thermostat • Use corrosion-resistant
and
Corroded or materials.
Thermostat • Loss of system
otherwise faulty • Test the safety valve.
Both closed • Severe injuries 4 2 8
valve and defective • Use a high-quality
or fatalities
thermostat thermostat
 FMECA Homework Assignment

Complete a hardware FMECA for a standard pair of inline skates. Use the lecture handout to
help you complete the FMECA. An FMECA worksheet has been included. It may be necessary
to make additional copies. Include a short cover memorandum discussing your FMECA and the
assumptions you made.

Learning objectives:
1. To develop an improved understanding of the need to consider all potential failure
modes of engineering components in the earliest phases of design concurrent with
other critical issues.
2. To develop an understanding of the procedure used to develop an FMECA.
3. To develop an increased understanding of the interaction of failure modes of
engineering components in design.
4. To develop improved understanding of the failure mechanisms of fatigue and wear
(with emphasis on fretting) in engineering components.
5. To develop an improved understanding of the critical issue of manufacturing as
related to its role on failure modes.
6. To develop an improved understanding of the critical role of material specifications in
relation to the control of failure.
7. To develop an improved understanding of the role of interfaces on failure modes in
design.
8. To develop an improved understanding of the role of dimensioning and tolerances in
failure processes and design.
9. To improve skills in preparing written technical reports.
10. To develop an increased understanding of the role of the FMEA and reliability issues
in the design process.
 Failure Mode, Effects, and Criticality Analysis

Hardware Failure Causes of Failure Effects Severity Probability Criticality Failure Immediate Long Term Comments
Item Modes Failure of Detection Intervention Intervention
Occurrence Methods
 FMECA Homework Assignment Solution (Example only; answers will vary)

Hardware Failure Causes of Failure Severity Probability Criticality Failure Immediate Long Term Comments
Item Modes Failure Effects of Detection Intervention Intervention
Occurrence Methods
Increased
Scheduled
friction, Visual Rotating or
Rubber Abrasive Abrasive wear inspection and
reduced 2 4 8 inspection/user replacing worn Difficult to prevent, easy to fix
wheels wear with road wheel
rolling feeling wheels
maintenance
“smoothness”
Increased
Deformation Scheduled
friction, Visual Rotating or
Deformation wear with inspection and
reduced 2 3 6 inspection/user replacing worn Difficult to prevent, easy to fix
wear wheel and wheel
rolling feeling wheels
road surface maintenance
“smoothness”
Annual
Yielding due Wheels not Routine
Metal sleeves inspection/user Replacement Requires taking apart the wheel
Yielding to load on free to roll as 3 2 6 inspection and
in wheels feeling extra of part assembly of blade
wheels easily lubrication
friction
Crack in the Annual
Wheel may Routine
sleeve caused inspection/user Replacement Requires taking apart the wheel
Fatigue fall out of 3 2 6 inspection and
by surface feeling extra of part assembly of blade
sleeve lubrication
fatigue friction
Crevice
Wheel not
corrosion; Annual
free to roll in Routine
Crevice solution inspection/user Replacement Requires taking apart the wheel
sleeve, may 3 2 6 inspection and
corrosion becomes feeling extra of part assembly of blade
lead to failure lubrication
trapped during friction
of sleeve
manufacture
Wheel not
Annual
Corrosion free to roll in Routine
Crevice inspection/user Replacement Requires taking apart the wheel
between metal sleeve, may 3 2 6 inspection and
corrosion feeling extra of part assembly of blade
and plastic lead to failure lubrication
friction
of sleeve
Wheel not
Annual
Stress free to roll in Routine
Stress inspection/user Replacement Requires taking apart the wheel
corrosion of sleeve, may 2 3 6 inspection and
corrosion feeling extra of part assembly of blade
sleeves lead to failure lubrication
friction
of sleeve
Wheel not
Annual
Wear between free to roll in Routine
Deformation inspection/user Replacement Requires taking apart the wheel
metal sleeves sleeve, may 3 2 6 inspection and
wear feeling extra of part assembly of blade
and wheels lead to failure lubrication
friction
of sleeve
Reduced Routine
Plastic Brake Abrasive Abrasive wear Visual inspection Replacement
stopping 2 4 8 inspection and Has safety impact on user
Block wear with road by user of block
ability replacement
Direct
Inspection, use
chemical May lose
Bolt/screw Direct Removal of old of another
attack occurs break block, Visual inspection Seals bolt to screw and is difficult to
assembly for chemical 2 4 8 assembly; material with
due to contact inability to by user remove
brake block attack replacement less corrosive
with water, stop/slow
tendencies
salt, etc.
References
Bloswick, Donald S., Systems Safety Analysis, NIOSH P.O. #939341

Goldberg, B.E., et al., System Engineering "Toolbox" for Design-Oriented Engineers,

NASA Reference Publication 1358, Marshall Space Flight Center, Alabama, 1994.

Hammer, W., Occupational Safety Management and Engineering, Fourth Edition,

Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1989.

MIL-STD-882B, 1984.

MIL-STD-1629A, Procedures for Performing a Failure Mode, Effects, and Criticality

Analysis, 24 Nov. 1980.

MIL-STD-1629A NOTICE 3.
http://astimage.daps.dla.mil/docimages/0001/12/92/1629CAN.PD6

O’Conner, Practical Reliability Engineering, 3rd edition, Revised, John Wiley & Sons,
Chichester, England, 1996.

Readings in System Safety Analysis, 5th Ed., Safety Sciences Dept., IUP.

Schubert, Michael. SAE G-11: Reliability, Maintainability, and Supportability

Guidebook. April 1992.

Vincoli, Jeffrey W., Basic Guide to System Safety, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York,
New York, 1997.